The Brinkman Ship MQA Listening Results

[Spacehound]

7 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

The Brinkman Ship has docked and I can report on between 8-10 hours of listening to MQA and Non MQA files

 

(When it is FREEZING out, plenty of incentive to get cozy with music, wine, and a great system).

 

The listening took place at a long time friend's East Side apartment.  The system was beyond reproach:

 

-MSB Reference DAC / Roon / Tidal

 

-VPI Prime table / Audio Research PH9

 

-Audio Research Ref 6 Preamp

 

-Ayre MX-R Twenty Mono Block Amplifiers

 

Wilson Alexx speaker system

 

Wireworld cabling for all

 

Audience power conditioning, Symposium Acoustics isolation devices and platforms

 

My host has a very large digital library stored on a NAS. And a decent size vinyl collection.

 

We listened to approx. 50 albums where we confirmed there was both an MQA version, and an official

24 bit digital download  and where we could confirm the mastering was the same. We listened to quite a few new releases as well.

 

Volumes matched as close as possible.

 

I had my host select albums play MQA streams from Tidal, then the same tracks from his NAS without telling

me which was which, and we turned off the display of the DAC.  We also muted the first 3 seconds of every track.

 

We repeated the process with me selecting tracks from Tidal and his NAS.

 

We also broke things up by playing tracks from his vinyl collection of some of the same albums.

 

Verdict:

 

In each an every, case, without exception, we both preferred the non MQA version. Some by a little, and some it was not even close.

 

The MQA version created a whole in the center and an artificial Left and Right Spread, and a digital sheen that was

off putting to say the least. We both concluded MQA was DESTRUCTIVE to the music.  It was quite an eye opener.

It sounded like what happens when you hit the "3D" or "Loudness" buttons on mid level home theater receivers.

MQA was putting far too strong a stamp on the music.  We even preferred his 24 bit vinyl rips to the MQA versions.

 

MQA screws up the tonality and the soundstage. Period.

 

Bob Stuart, John Atkinson, Michael Lavorgna, Robert Harley, Jim Austin, John Darko (did I miss anyone?)..

you should all be ashamed of your selves.

 

MQA is by far the biggest farce ever perpetrated in "high end audio". 

 

Couple this with all the data presented here, the measurements, and looking behind the curtain at the financials,

the motives, and the players, it is clear MQA is a wholesale fraud.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for 'publishing' your efforts.

 

I've found much the same, it sort of 'exaggerates' the music, maybe because of the artifacts it creates.

 

It can sound 'lively' at first so can be quite attractive, but I found I was losing interest, which  I am told is a sign of 'listening fatigue'.

 

The press people are either paid shills, (though if so probably not paid directly but are fully aware of  how their continued employment works) or don't  listen for long periods. 

 

(It's not a 'fraud' as such, but a  last ditch attempt to preserve the existence of the Meridian company, from which MQA Ltd is not genuinely separate, and thus Stuart's income.)

[Spacehound]

13 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

 

"I will say, though, that of all the MQA DACs I've tried, I couldn't hear any improvement with the Explorer 2 or the Bluesound Node 2 -- both of these are pretty bad DACs."

 

Well, now, that is pretty hilarious. Because "Golden Ears" Atkinson and Lavorgna, as well as Darko RAVED about the sound

of MQA through those DACs.

 

Thanks for helping confirm they have no credibility.

 

The only thing made up is your MQA enthusiasm.

GUTB didn't reply to Fokus's similar comment. I wonder if he will reply to yours?

 

To me the Explorer 2 is a real sticking point for MQA and very funny as well. "Hoist by your own petard"

 

[Spacehound]

16 minutes ago, GUTB said:

The Explorer 2 is not a good DAC.....

So there we have it.

 

'Bob', the CEO/chief designer of Meridian  produces  what we might call a 'first signifer'  to show the 'merits' of MQA  for MQA Ltd, of which he is also the CEO/chief designer and it isn't any good.

 

Does  that give you pause that Meridian, which 'Bob' founded after the failure of his first company, the disastrous Lecson Audio,   has never made a profit in the forty years of its existence?  Thus causing suspicion (now found to be well-justified) about MQA from the more experienced members of the audio community.

[Spacehound]

27 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

According to company filings, Bob's appointment as a director of Meridian was terminated on September 4, 2017.

I didn't l know that, not being a fanboy.  Meridian has been a game of musical chairs since it started.

 

It's all the same outfit anyway,  owned by Richemont of Switzerland who are a  'luxury goods' outfit, mostly watches, who instantly put it in their 'more financially dodgy' division.

 

So as in all  foreign owned  'subsidiaries' the board(s)  don't have any real power, they are just there to make the 'local natives' feel ok about it. 

[Spacehound]

2 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Wrong.

We in the UK must be somewhat backward. l suspect less than 1 in a  1000 would know what a DAC is, let alone a 'music' one.

[Spacehound]

Just now, kumakuma said:

 

Not sure how passing on this information makes me a fanboy...

 

If anything the fact that Bob appears to have been pushed out of Meridian bolsters your point.

 

I wasn't intending  to suggest you were.

[Spacehound]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

 

What's funny about that?

You said the Explorer 2  is a bad DAC yourself.

 

And the rest (leaving aside the 'neuroscience' psychobabble) is demonstrably untrue.

[Spacehound]

1 hour ago, Brinkman Ship said:

 

 

I meant "wrong" about "liking" MQA or not. There is far more to it then that.

He'd right about the  expensive cables too.

 

I will only buy one of those when the manufacturer gets a Nobel Prize  for discovering some previously unknown physics. Which has to be  relevant, replacing Einstein's General Relativity or  figuring out a  Unified Field Theory isn't good enough (though of course his  UFT could be it it's true ).

 

The company I work for has had several Nobel Prizes for physics and stuff. But  we don't know how to make  a fancy audio cable even though most of our stuff is electronic.

[Spacehound]

 

He's in a lose-lose situation. Sink or swim, he's had it  

 

 

 

[Spacehound]

2 hours ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

May have been said before, but the following :

https://www.cambridgeaudio.com/gbr/en/products/hifi-and-home-cinema/dacmagic-plus

Costs £350, and is just as good as any DAC costing more than 10x.

There are many more just as good, and just as cheap.

Regards,

Shadders.

Actually it isn't. It exaggerates sibilants so much it makes talk radio almost unlistenable. And I'm not the only that thinks so - there's a recent short thread  about it on here.

For a couple of years until I bought something else it convinced me that BBC 320 AAC 'talk'   was useless compared to FM.

[Spacehound]

11 minutes ago, Shadders said:

. I've got one of theHi,

OK- for subjective listening - it may unliked, but engineering wise - for the cost compared to high end, it is just as good.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

11 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

OK- for subjective listening - it may unliked, but engineering wise - for the cost compared to high end, it is just as good.

Regards,

Shadders.

You get as much 'physical' stuff, and as  well screwed together,  for your money, yes. Shame it doesn't actually work too well. Quite frankly compared to  a Chord Mojo at only £50 more, it's  awful. 

 

Which is a pity, Cambridge stuff is usually pretty good. 

[Spacehound]

35 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

That's a very nice feature

I gave you an uptick for that  

[Spacehound]

6 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Yes, it was Jim Austin who raved about MQA with the Explorer 2. Not you.

 

Actually I was trying to attribute the Bluesound (and Explorer2) rave to a group of reviewers: John Darko, Michael Lavorgna, and others,  WHO DID use them , and it seems I did not do this correctly.

 

For the record, you clearly did not use those units, but the Prime and the flagship Meridian DAC in your MQA write ups.

Doesn't matter who it was.

 

They are all singing the same tune, conducted by the editor,  because staff on magazines get paid via advertising, and while mild criticisms are allowed as it makes them look 'sincere',   they all know where their pay comes from. The industry must not be offended, criticise any one of them you have criticised them all. Goodbye pay, goodbye getting a job in the industry, goodbye getting a job on another magazine.

 

It's different on forums because WE do most of   the criticism/praise. And we have nothing to gain or  lose by doing either.

 

Also forum membership  increases  while magazine readership goes down. They  don't like that, obviously, thus the vitriolic anti-forum comments from magazine editors and staff (which are always great fun to read).

[Spacehound]

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

or... he really isn't a McKinsey consultant

He was never a McKinsey consultant. He just attempted to imply he was.

 

Looking at his comments they wouldn't employ such an ineffective person. He couldn't  even understand a formal annual report (as required by the UK gubmint and available in full  on the UK gubmint site), as we can see from his 'car audio' and 'USA division' comments about the MQA Ltd report. Even when we gave him a link to the report he had to be told where to look for the summary and then he didn't know what 'consolidated' meant.

[Spacehound]

44 minutes ago, Thuaveta said:

 

Unless there's a subculture similar to the fake SEALS bunch that get off by posing as distinguished suits, I'd say it's likely you're mistaken there. His posts here don't exactly put McKinsey's analytical capabilities in a good light on the face of it, though I'd kindly remind everyone that it's extremely likely his thinking, in terms of finances, is much more evolved than in terms of audio and takes into account complex financial structures.

 

Always keep in mind that Meridian's matryoshka-like structure of parent companies are world-class at tax optimisation when reading Lee's posts on the financials, and that while the numbers do look bad, in the end, there's relatively little we know about them.

To me  his total inability to understand a fairly short and simple  financial report demonstrates quite clearly that it  is unlikely he worked for any 'business consultancy', let alone McKinseys. He couldn't even understand the standard terminology.

 

Most of these 'consultancies' are totally clueless anyway. Its a fool company that contracts out their  'thinking' to such outfits, who have never even seen the 'front line', let alone been on it,  and don't have to answer to their clients shareholders.

 

And he posts utter BS about everything else so why not that too?

 

He's just an industry   'hanger on'. I suspect those he calls his 'industry friends'  treat him with contempt when his back is turned.

 

And as you can see, his 'efforts' don't even work. Not to the slightest degree.

 

As for Meridian they are 'invisible' in their home country, always have been, and have never turned a profit in their 40 years of business, being entirely propped up by his wealthy wife (presumably to get him out of the kitchen). Stuart's previous effort, Lecson Audio, was also a quick disaster. He couldn't  design a paper bag.

[Spacehound]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

What makes you believe other/actual such "consultants" are any better? Remember the Bobs in Office Space? It's a fairly accurate portrayal.

 

 

What's an "office"? I'm at the coalface. As in:

 

"Can I borrow a monkey wrench?"

 

"Sure, large, small, or watchmakers?"

[Spacehound]

Just now, GUTB said:

 

I’m sorry, but there’s how many high end audio magazines in print today — two? They don’t survive in this day and age by just shilling for whoever puts up full page ads. They survive because the ears that write for them have a degree of trustworthiness and experience that keeps people reading.

That's an opinion, same as everyone  else stuff is. It's not a 'fact'.

[Spacehound]

19 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

In other words, MQA may be the beginning of the end for these trade rags, and all it took was a silly, lossy, DRM spiked fabricated entity like MQA to expose their true colors.

The paper ones are dying anyway.

Like buggy-whip manufacturers did  when the internal combustion engine was invented. It's great what a few  nerds playing with home-made computers can achieve given a not very long time. I was one of them.

And no sane person is going to pay for an online one when there are so many audio sites  to choose from.

 

Thus the vitriol from them  when people post their  honestly-held  opinions here and elsewhere. 

[Spacehound]

42 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Why are you guys literally inventing make-believe wrongs committed against you by MQA?

Because there are many pages of solid evidence against it, here and elsewhere. Proof that it doesn't do what it claims, too.

 

If you chose to ignore that it's your business.

[Spacehound]

22 minutes ago, Norton said:

 

There was no test.  Just  one of the well established anti-MQA obsessives on this site posting under a new identity.

 

From a month of listening, overall  I am underwhelmed by MQA and  certainly don't consider it any kind of significant positive development.  However, those more fervently "anti" really do themselves a disservice by validating their options against sham threads like this.  

Don't forget that there is  solid proof, both by measurement and mathematics, that it does have audible artifacts, reduces everything to 17 bits at most, and doesn't go beyond 96 though it fools your  non-MQA DAC into lighting up higher, introduces fake 'noise' to match, and is no smaller in most cases than a regular FLAC file.

 

Whether any of this matters or not is a separate issue (my tests so far using Tidal tells me, but  maybe  not everyone else, that it doesn't). But it can't 'improve' anything.

[Spacehound]

3 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Not only did he correct that bit, but you acknowledged his correction as well.  Which makes the motivation for this particular post at least suspect.

 

Why? Brinkman Ship has already made one demonstrably false post, apologise or not. There  is no good  reason to trust him 'forever' after that. Thus JA's check. ..

[Spacehound]

17 minutes ago, realhifi said:

 

So I’m guessing you feel we should no longer have an “Audio Press” such as Absolute Sound, Stereophile, What Hi-Fi”,  Tone Audio, Hi-Fi+, etc, etc.?

It's the "ethics" that amused me.

 

These things are merely vehicles for advertising with just  enough  content for  some people to buy them. No more than that.  And the owning group have zero interest in what any of their set of magazines is about as long as each meets its advertising revenue target  One (non audio) magazine  I occasionally read,  its  fellow magazines cover   knitting, fishing, model  airplanes,  'craft'. and toy soldiers/war games, among a few others I am unaware of.

[Spacehound]

18 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Back to Basildon are we, as it's in Ethics, a county like Suthex, or Wethexs.

I'm in the UK and have heard of it. But I don't know, nor care, where it is.  It's probably near Slough.

 

"Oh come, friendly bomb, and fall on Slough"

- John Betjeman, one time 'Royal Poet' several years after WW2 

 

BTW:

"Thome people  thay I lithp, but I mythelf don't think tho. Hear me thay thethe thimple wordth, thugar, thoap, and thago"

[Spacehound]

40 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

 

 

And did you also find aliasing and other artifacts, as did Paul Miller and Archimago?

I take your point on the Exlporer 2. But this 'error' is different.

 

Aliasing.  You find what you are looking for, then stop.

That  the wheels fell off later when you were deliberately  looking the other way, is not reported

 

And it's from Stuart, a man with a 40 year record of failure. Which the magazines know as well as I do.

[Spacehound]

40 minutes ago, realhifi said:

Not sure why you won’t. I’m just trying to get an answer for my very first question to you about where to find information and referrals on new Hi-Fi speakers. You are very clear that you think the loose community of blogs and unpaid public at large is the way forward to getting honest assessment of audio gear and all I’m trying to find out is where that is?  Do I need to go to numerous sites and pick through bit’s of information from anonymous posters?  Is there a clearing house for those comments on speakers?  Quite simply where do I go?

It's not perfect but it's about the most honest  way there is.

 

Anonymous? So are you.